MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1467152880 · doi:10.1118/1.4926303

TH‐EF‐BRB‐05: Dynamic Blade Collimation for Image Quality Improvement and Dose Reduction in CBCT Guidance

2015· article· en· W1467152880 on OpenAlexaff
David Parsons, James L. Robar

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollimatorIsocenterImaging phantomCollimated lightImage qualityTruebeamLinear particle acceleratorNuclear medicineMedical imagingComputer scienceOpticsPhysicsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceMedicineBeam (structure)Laser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The focus of this work is the development of a novel blade collimation system enabling volume‐of‐interest (VOI) CBCT using the kV source on a TrueBeam linear accelerator (linac). Advantages of the system are assessed, particularly with regard to reduction and localization of dose, as well as improvement of image quality. Methods: A four blade dynamic kV collimator was developed to track a VOI during a CBCT acquisition. The system is controlled using a Raspberry Pi computer placed within the linac gantry. The current prototype is capable of tracking an arbitrary volume defined by the treatment planner for subsequent CBCT guidance. During gantry rotation, the collimator tracks the VOI with adjustment of position and dimension. CBCT image quality was investigated as a function of collimator dimension, while maintaining the same dose to the VOI, for a 20 cm diameter cylindrical water phantom with a 9 mm diameter bone insert centered on isocenter. Dose distributions for various anatomical sites were modeled using a dynamic BEAMnrc library and DOSXYZnrc. The resulting VOI dose distributions were compared to full‐field distributions to quantify dose reduction and localization to the target volume. Results: Preliminary measurements show contrast increase by a factor of 1.3 and noise reduction by a factor of 1.7, for CBCT. This results in a increase in contrast‐to‐noise ratio by a factor of approximately 2.2. Depending upon the anatomical site, dose was reduced to 15%–80% of the full field value along the central axis plane and down to less than 1% along the axial planes. Conclusion: The present system allows CBCT imaging of a planner‐defined volume, offering both image quality improvement and reduction of imaging dose for the patient. Current work involves the development of fluence modulation for VOI CBCT. This work was supported through a research partnership with Varian Medical, Incorporated.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→